The question of whether 700 BCE (i.e. the year starting in Tishre of 700 BCE) could have been a Shmita can be examined by looking at references to possible Sabbatical years in Scripture and elsewhere. In this endeavor, the time of the First Temple should be considered separately from the time of the Second Temple and later, due to evidence that the counting of the Sabbatical years was interrupted during the exile (see below). The Second Temple period will be considered first. This is the more easily dealt with, since there are explicit mentions of a Sabbatical year found in Josephus, 1 Maccabees, and in various legal contracts from the time of Simon Bar Kosiba. In contrast, no direct statements that a certain year was a Sabbatical year have survived from First Temple times, so that for thi
| Attributes | Values |
|---|
| rdfs:label
| - Historical Sabbatical Years
|
| rdfs:comment
| - The question of whether 700 BCE (i.e. the year starting in Tishre of 700 BCE) could have been a Shmita can be examined by looking at references to possible Sabbatical years in Scripture and elsewhere. In this endeavor, the time of the First Temple should be considered separately from the time of the Second Temple and later, due to evidence that the counting of the Sabbatical years was interrupted during the exile (see below). The Second Temple period will be considered first. This is the more easily dealt with, since there are explicit mentions of a Sabbatical year found in Josephus, 1 Maccabees, and in various legal contracts from the time of Simon Bar Kosiba. In contrast, no direct statements that a certain year was a Sabbatical year have survived from First Temple times, so that for thi
|
| sameAs
| |
| dcterms:subject
| |
| dbkwik:religion/pr...iPageUsesTemplate
| |
| abstract
| - The question of whether 700 BCE (i.e. the year starting in Tishre of 700 BCE) could have been a Shmita can be examined by looking at references to possible Sabbatical years in Scripture and elsewhere. In this endeavor, the time of the First Temple should be considered separately from the time of the Second Temple and later, due to evidence that the counting of the Sabbatical years was interrupted during the exile (see below). The Second Temple period will be considered first. This is the more easily dealt with, since there are explicit mentions of a Sabbatical year found in Josephus, 1 Maccabees, and in various legal contracts from the time of Simon Bar Kosiba. In contrast, no direct statements that a certain year was a Sabbatical year have survived from First Temple times, so that for this period, whether a certain year was a Sabbatical year must be inferred from statements about activities normally associated with a Shmita. An example of this is the 2 Kings passage mentioned above, where a year of no sowing or reaping is the most distinctive attribute indicating a Sabbatical year.
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)